Re: timetz range check issue - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Chernow
Subject Re: timetz range check issue
Date
Msg-id 476D21CF.6060401@esilo.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: timetz range check issue  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: timetz range check issue  ("Usama Dar" <munir.usama@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
 >Tom Lane wrote:>>range-checks are present only where needed for the backend to defend itself

Survival is very important, but so is maintaining data integrity.  IMHO, data 
validation should be as consistent as possible.  If the backend refuses data on 
one hand but allows it on the other, confusion sets in.  I realize that binary 
input can't always be 100% validated, but a best effort is good form.  It looks 
like most recv funcs already have checks, where a check is somewhat meaningful.

andrew



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Spoofing as the postmaster
Next
From: "D'Arcy J.M. Cain"
Date:
Subject: Re: Spoofing as the postmaster